~ For human rights and against all kinds of ditnac

Monthly Archives: August 2014

There are eight planets in the social system. They used to be nine. But in 2006, one of them ceased to be a planet. So now there’s only eight planets left. To truly understand what happened, we must understand the difference between physical reality and social reality. This case of the missing planet also happens to be a perfect example for explaining the difference between these layers of reality.

You see, humanity has had a lot of impact on planet Earth. We have built cities, roads and canals all over the place. Rearranged the biosphere and changed the climate. Our physical constructions, such as buildings, are also social constructions in many ways, being products of civilization. Thus, physical reality and social reality are intertwined.

While our impact on Earth has been great, we have made only minimal impact on The Moon and on the planet Mars. A flag here, a robot there. Some footprints and tracks. So far, we have had no impact at all on any other planet or similar. Not in this solar system, and not beyond the solar system either.

Thus, the fact that Pluto used to be a planet but isn’t a planet any more… it has nothing to do with humans affecting Pluto itself. It is not Pluto that has changed, only our perception of it. The thing is this: Those things we call “planets” are not socially constructed. Not only are they a part of physical reality, but they are a part that is too far out of our reach to interact with social reality at all. However, the very concept of “planet” is a social construction. All concepts are socially constructed. They are more or less arbitrary, and they are changing over time.

When astronomers made the distinction between planets and stars, only a few planets were known. These were the largest and closest planets, because these were the ones easiest for us to observe. Pluto was the by far smallest of the planets. Later on, asteroids were discovered, but Pluto was too big to be considered an asteroid. So it remained a planet. But then it was discovered that asteroids like Ceres was actually on the same kind of size as Pluto. A choice had to be made. A choice between constantly adding new planets to our vision of the solar system, while having a hard time drawing the line between planet and asteroid. Therefore, in 2006, a new category was created: Dwarf-planets! Pluto, Ceres and three others were exiled to this category. Thus the number of planets in the solar system was reduced to eight.

When this kind of choice is made, it is not a matter of right versus wrong. Pluto is not a planet. This is true by definition, because Pluto does not fit our definition of what a planet is. Pluto used to be a planet, and this was also true by definition. Because Pluto did fit the definition we used to have of what a planet is. The question is not whether the definitions are right or wrong, but to what extent they are reasonable.

Astronomers didn’t discover that Pluto is not a planet, they decided it. But they did make this decision based on the discoveries they made, and this decision was a very reasonable decision to make.

Back in 2006, one of my friends took the decision very badly. It brought her to despair, crying because Pluto wasn’t a planet anymore. Not that she cared about Pluto, her problem was that the universe didn’t make sense to her anymore. If we can’t even trust that the number of planets in our very solar system is correct, what can we trust? She didn’t understand that there was never a truth to trust or distrust. It wasn’t the planets that had changed. Only our conceptualization of them.

Categories and other concepts do not exist in physical reality. They are social constructs: They are things that we human beings make up as we go along. We create and reinforce our categories individually in internal realities, as well collectively in social realities. If we fail to understand that concepts exist only in our minds and in our cultures, we will not be able to understand ourselves and each other. Furthermore, we won’t be able to understand physical reality either.

The universe is vast, and it exists independently of us. It is not socially constructed. Our understanding of this universe, however, is always socially constructed. How tempting it is to believe that our minds and culture shapes the universe around us. To believe that is the universe that is a small part of us, rather than we who are a small part of the universe.

The truth, however is that human perceptions of reality are always limited and subjective. They can be better or worse, especially when it comes to understanding the universe as well as understanding ourselves and each other. While constructs are ultimately arbitrary, they are NOT all equally valid. Some constructs promotes prejudices or misperceptions, while others promote more valid understanding. What we need to do is to always strive towards better perspectives and more reasonable concepts. Not delude ourselves into thinking that our current perspectives and concepts hold ultimate truth.

There are two videos I would like you to watch. Especially the first one. It is a brilliant summary of certain traditional ideals of patriotism, faith and masculinity. See this chorus of brave and faithful men singing their hearts out about how they will fight for their land, their families, their religion and their nation, tribe, empire or ethnic group.

Rid yourself of the narrative structure where one side is the heroic protagonists and the other is the villainous antagonists. Realize instead that all of these men are completely honest. That they all mean well and try their best to be good, in their limited understanding of what goodness means.

The other video partially touches on the same core issue, and highlights the core issue: The delusion that truth and morality revolves around one’s own group. In this case ethnic and religious group, but the same principle exemplified in this video applies to ANY categorization of people.

The basic truth that each of us need to understand is this: “The world does not revolve around me or any particular group of people I identify with. My point of view is subjective, our common point of view is also subjective, and other people are people too. What matters is not whether one is religious or not, but HOW one relates to ones beliefs – whether these beliefs are religious, political and/or otherwise.

There are three layers of reality: Physical, internal and social.

The physical world exists independently of us humans. The internal realities ARE humans, each of us having our own subjective realities where the subjective experience is the objective truth: However connected or disconnected in relation to physical reality, it is objectively true that we do experience it. Social realities exist between humans. We need to learn to coexist in peace. To let our social realities mesh and mingle peacefully, rather than invade each other by force. While we need to recognize that all points of view have the same inherent value, we also need to recognize that there are facts and universal truths out there. Such as the fact that other human beings are just as human as you are, and that any system of morality that fails to empathize with them is a deeply flawed system. When people agree that morality is about providing for one’s own ethnic or religious or blood-line group at other people’s expense, they merely agree to all kill each other. Such a position is inherently destructive on a level that a civilization capable of mass destruction cannot afford to have. We, as a species, need to grow up. For this, we need universal human rights.

Stage 1: Sexism is a fake idea invented by feminists.
Stage 2: Sexism happens, but the effect of “reverse sexism” on men is as bad or worse.
Stage 3: Sexism happens, but the important part is that I personally am not sexist.
Stage 4: Sexism happens, and I benefit from that whether or not I personally am sexist.
Stage 5: Sexism happens, I benefit from it, I am unavoidably sexist sometimes because I was socialized that way, and if I want to be anti-sexist I have to be actively working against that socialization. ”

——

This model has two main points. I agree with one, and disagree with the other.

I agree that the five stages is a development that many have to go through. Not only regarding sexism, but also regarding racism and other foci of categorism.

I disagree with the idea that the stages are specific to men, or the privileged group in any dichotomy.

Society is complex.
It includes sexism, non-sexism and anti-sexism, as well as racism, non-racism and anti-racism.

Kids of all genders and colors are socialized in all sorts of ways, including some really bad ones.
As they grow up, they need to overcome prejudices and bigotries they have been socialized with.

A lot of people, of all genders, look down on women. As they look at a random woman, they will call her a slut if she’s sexual and a prude if she’s not. They will scold her for having or not having a career, and for having or not having kids. Either way, they will assume that she’s incompetent in all things compared to a random man. All things, except for boring menial tasks.

The first three stages applies equally to people of all genders, trying to overcome the bad parts of their socialization.

It should also be noted that women gain some benefits, although these benefits are far smaller than the losses, from traditional gender roles. And that sexism against men, while a smaller thing than sexism against women, is also a thing. For these two reasons, the fourth and fifth stage does apply to women as well.

It is now 2014. Over the last couple of years, you might have heard more and more people ranting about “White heterosexual men”. They used to rant only about “men”. This was based on patriarchy theory, which is basically the idea that men have all power and that this sucks.

Patriarchy theory is somewhat outdated. It is getting replaced with intersectionality and kyriarchy theory. Intersectionality is that we need to think not only about gender OR race, but about both and about other factors as well. How they intersect with each other. Kyriarchy is about the power of dominant groups, whatever those groups may be. In other words, kyriarchy is patriarchy – except that it is not limited to gender.

To understand kyriarchy, you must understand what a social structure is. A social structure is a pattern, not a group of people. Thus, a reasonable understanding of kyriarchy is not about what categories people belong to. Instead, it is about how people get treated in society based on categorization.

For example, people tend to have opinions. And they do tend to consider their own opinions to be right. This is universal, having nothing to do with categorizations such as race, sexual orientation or gender.

However, a random person who happens to be white, heterosexual, male or all of the above tends to get taken more seriously and be treated better than a random person who is not any or all of these things. This difference in treatment is likely to have happened to them both many times in the past. Therefore, this other person also may also tend to have worse self-esteem and self-confidence than they deserve. These differences are unfair, and thus immoral. The systematic prejudice, bigotry and discrimination against certain categories of people is absurd, and silly in a way that isn’t funny at all. We are all human. We human beings need to treat each other well, regardless of categorizations such as race or gender. Each of us need to take each of our fellow human beings as seriously as they deserve, based on their own merit and on giving everyone a fair chance.

Kyriarchy is expressed not by a person having an opinion about something, even if this person happens to be white and male and so on. Kyriarchy is expressed by people of all genders and so on who takes his opinion more seriously than they would take the same opinion when expressed by a person of equal merit who happens to be not entirely white, not entirely male, or both.

Hating people for their race or gender is bullshit. It is categorism, which is prejudice, bigotry and/or discrimination based on a categorization of people. While this includes hating people because they happen to be white heterosexual men, it does NOT include hating the unfair privileges people these people get.

Personally, I hate the unfair structures in the world. This has nothing to do with what categories I belong or doesn’t belong to, it has nothing to do with hating myself or others. It is irrelevant that I happened to be born in a way that make me easy to categorize as white, heterosexual and male. This is not something for me to be proud or ashamed of. It is simply the way I happened to be born, and there is no such thing as original sin. I want people to listen to me and take me seriously for what I have to say, not for the color or hairiness of the skin that surrounds my mouth. And I have very little patience with people who want to validate me, or dismiss me, on such shallow basis.

So please, everyone. Treat each other as human beings, not as categories. To be able to truly see your fellow human beings as individuals, you need to see that they live in social contexts. Fight against the power structures, fight against the prejudices and bigotries that fuel them.